ciple which created them, that their immediate effect was exceedingly injurious, since they contributed, together with the other abuses just mentioned, to disseminate false and unworthy notions respecting the nature of Christianity. Foremost among them, the gross Millenarian doctrine, which was the firstborn child of tradition, was supported and diffused by those writings; and it did not cease to exercise, in various parts of Christendom, a pernicious and perhaps powerful influence, until it was checked by the pen of Origen and succeeding writers. The distinction of the converts into Catechumens,' and Faithful,' or Believers,' (IlσToi) was introduced after the age of Justin, and before or during that of Tertullian*. Its motive was probably twofold;-first, to prove the sincerity, to instruct the ignorance, to ascertain or correct the morality of the ruder proselytes, who were now numerous and eager for baptism, and so to restrain the indiscriminate performance of that rite; next, to conciliate reverence and excite curiosity by the temporary concealment of the most solemn ceremonies of the new religion. To this end the Catechumens were only admitted to the previous part of the service, and, before the celebration of the Holy Sacraments, were dismissedt: all that followed was strictly veiled from them, until the time of their own initiation. Even from the above short description it is easy to discover in this early Christian practice an imitation of the system of Pagan mysteries. These, as is well known, were twofold in number and importance-the first or lesser being of common notoriety, and easy access to all conditions and ages, while the greater were revealed, with considerable discrimination, to such only as were thought qualified for the privilege, by their rank, or knowledge, or virtue. The name also passed into the Liturgies of the Church; and the Sacraments, which were withdrawn from the profane eye of the Catechumens, were denominated mysteries. These mysteries continued for some time, perhaps till the beginning of the fourth century, to be two only, Baptism and the Eucharist. We have proofs, indeed, that in that age the ceremonies, at least of Penitential Absolution, of Ordination, and Confirmation ‡, were concealed from the uninitiated, as carefully as the two original Sacraments; and hence no doubt arose the error which has sanctified them by the same name. Regarding De Prescrip. adv. Hæret. cap. 41. He censures the heretics for not making the distinction in question in their congregations. Ite, Missa est. (i. e. Ecclesia.) Go-it is dismissed. This seems, upon the whole, the most probable origin of the words, Missal, Mass; though many others have been proposed. (See Bingham, b. xiii., chap. i.) Oi àzowàvntoi, wigiñargar-Non-communicants, departwas the Greek form of separating the two classes. Bingham is very minute, and probably very faithful, in describing the nature of the Missa Catechumenorum and the Missa Fidelium, or Communion Service-though the forms, as he gives them, probably belonged to the fourth and the subsequent, rather than the preceding, centuries. But a summary of the instructions delivered to the former is given by the author of the Constit. Apostol., lib. vii., c. 39. It embraces the knowledge of the Trinity, the order of the world's creation and series of Divine Providence, as exhibited in the Old Testament: the doctrine of Christ's Incarnation, Passion, Resurrection, and Assumption, and what it is to renounce the devil and to enter into the Covenant of Christ. The passages which respectively prove these three facts are from Optatus contr. Parmen., liv.ii., p. 57; Chrysostom Hom., 18, in ii. Cor. p. 872; and Innocent I., Epist. i., ad Decentium Eugubin: and are cited by Bingham, Antiq., book x., chapter v. St. Basil (De Spir. Sanct., c. 27) places the Oil of Chrisin among the things which the uninitiated might not look upon; while St. Augustin (Comm. in Psalm ciii., Concio. i.) says, Quid est quod occultum est et non publicum in Ecclesia? Sacramentum Baptismi, Sacramentum Eucha ristie. Opera nostra bona vident et Pagani, Sacramenta vero occultantur illis.' The practice probably varied in different Churches; but the whole proves that the Seven Sacraments were not yet acknowledged in any. the rite of Baptism, we have noticed in a former chapter a misapprehen-. sion of its true nature and object, which gained very early footing in the Church; and the consequent abuse of deferring it until the hour of death was clearly customary before the days of Constantine; we need not pause to point out the evils which obviously proceeded from it *. The original simple character of the eucharistical assemblies of the primitive Christians, such as they are described by Justin Martyr, was first exalted by the strong and almost ambiguous language of Irenæus, and still further by the exaggerated though vague expressions of subsequent writers †. By such means the Eucharist gradually rose to be considered the most abstruse and awful of the mysteries. Yet is it still doubtful whether this grew to be a great abuse before the establishment of the Church; though the secresy and exclusiveness which surrounded its most holy ceremony offended the open character of the religion, and even lessened its estimation among the wise and virtuous, by introducing an unworthy assimilation to the mummeries of Paganism. It was an opinion in the third century, originating, perhaps, with Tertullian, but more expressly declared by Dionysius, That the holy martyrs were the assessors of Christ and participators in his kingdom, and partakers in his judgment, sitting in judgment with him .' While we read this extravagant conceit of that early age, we might almost be disposed to praise the moderation of later times, which were contented to invest those holy sufferers with the character of mediators. But long even before the age of Dionysius, and probably before any thought had been raised respecting their immediate exaltation or beatification, it had been a natural and even pious custom to celebrate the birthdays of those who had offered themselves up as sacrifices for their religion. By their birthdays (their yevéola) were understood, not the days of their introduction to the sins and afflictions of earth, but of their release from such bondage and their resurrection to glory. These days of their nativity to everlasting life were observed (as indeed it was fit) in joyous commemoration of the piety of the departed, and of the example which they had bequeathed to posterity. Assemblies were held for this purpose at the tombs of the martyrs, or on the spots where they had perished, and their frequency is attested by Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, and others of the oldest fathers. The Maprúpwv yevéria Μαρτύρων γενέθλια were the saints' days of the early Christians, and may be traced at least as far back as the execution of Polycarp §; and as the places of meeting were not then consecrated by chapels or sanctuaries, and as the mortal, whose euthanasia was commemorated, was not yet made an object of superstitious adoration, it would be too severe to charge upon those innocent demonstrations of popular reverence the system of idolatrous impiety which was built in later ages on that foundation ||. Gibbon somewhere proposes a question, which we profess our inability to resolve, whether this pernicious practice was at any time condemned by any Council of the Church? The passages in Irenæus which have given occasion to the warmest controversy, and not wholly without ground, are lib. iv., c. 17 (or 32) and 18 (or 34), and lib. v., c. 2, Miracula Sacræ Cœnæ vel Cyprianus audet narrare. Semler. Observ. Nov., &c. Tertull. de Resurrectione Carnis, cap. 43. Nemo enim peregrinatus a corpore statim immoratur penes Dominum, nisi ex martyrii prerogativa, Paradiso scilicet non Inferis deversurus. And lib. de Anima, cap. 55. Dionys. ap. Euseb., liv. vi., cap. 42. To Xgro πάρεδροι, καὶ τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ κοινωνοὶ καὶ μέτοχοι τῆς κρίσεως αὐτοῦ, καὶ συνδικάζοντες αὐτῷ. In the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna to that of Philomelium (in Euseb., liv. iv., cap. 15), the writers, after mention of the martyrdom of Polycarp, express their intention, by God's permission, to meet at his tomb and celebrate his birthday.' See Cave, Primitive Christianity, p. ii., ch. 7. We do not mean that there was no tendency to superstition in the honours paid to The use of prayers and even of offerings for the dead was earlier than the age of Tertullian*; nor is it any wonder that the numerous converts from Paganism should bring over with them some fragments of their former observances. But there is no just reason to suspect that the ante-Nicene Church studied to turn them to its own profit, or at least that they were made to minister to the avarice of the clergy. If they were encouraged, it was rather through the hope of increasing by such indulgence the number of the proselytes. The mortification of occasional fasting was probably enjoined in the earliest age. For the ceremony of Baptism, as we learn from Justin, both the neophyte and the congregation were prepared by abstinence; and in the time of Tertullian, the Bishops, if he beliest them not, found their advantage in increasing the number of such observances. The first general fast was on Good Friday, and it does not appear that any others were very soon added, or at least universally received. Yet there can be no doubt, that long before the fourth century at least some part of Lent was strictly observed, and a partial fast (till three in the afternoon) on the fourth and sixth days of every week, is by some referred to very high antiquity. Upon the whole it would seem, however, that, until the establishment of the Church, a great variety prevailed in this department of its discipline, dependent in some measure on the circumstances of particular provinces, and the individual regulations of the Bishops presiding there. When we consider in what countries the religion was revealed, and among what people it first spread, it is natural to search for the oldest forms of its external economy in the Jewish, and for those somewhat less ancient in the Pagan, system;—and thus we find them to have originated, so far at least as the origin of either can be discovered with any certainty. There can be little doubt, for instance, that the very early distinction between Clergy and Laity was immediately derived from the corresponding institution of Judaism. The gradations and offices of the original Priesthood, and the power of the Presbytery, proceeded from the same source§, and the subsequent introduction of the more dignified term Sacerdos attested the continuation of the same influence. Again, There seems to be nothing more uncontested among learned men than that the Jews had set forms of worship in all parts of Divine Service, and that the Apostles freely used these in all instances in which they thought it necessary or becoming to join with them. Their ordinary service was of two sorts-the service of the Temple and the service of the Synagogue. These differed in many martyrs even in the third century. Relics were already coming into consideration, the blood of the sufferers was eagerly collected in sponges, and other similar extravagances are recorded; but these were the natural excesses of popular enthusiasm, and would have ceased with the cessation of persecution, if they had not afterwards been perpetuated and systematized by the arts of a corrupt priesthood. *Tertull. de Monogamia, c. 10. He may do so, for in his Liber de Jejuniis' he is writing in favour of Montanism against the Church. Bene autem quod et Episcopi universæ plebi mandare jejunia assolent; non dico de industria stipium conferendarum, ut vestræ capturæ est, sed interdum et ex aliqua solicitudinis Ecclesiasticæ causa. See Thomassin, Traité des Jeunes de l'Eglise. The Quadragesimal Fast (recuqunor) is by some supposed to indicate the number of hours of abstinence which preceded the festival of the Resurrection. But in the time of Chrysostom (who calls Lent the remedy and physic of the soul') and of Theodosius the Great (who suspended all criminal proceedings and punishments during its continuance) the entire period was unquestionably observed. See Cave on the Early Church, chapter vii. There is a passage in St. Clement's First Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. 40, in which the system of Jewish discipline is indirectly proposed as a model for the imitation of Christians. respects; but both agreed in this, that the public prayers in both were offered up in a certain constant form of words*.' To what extent this practice was imitated in the primitive Church remains extremely uncertain, notwithstanding the controversial labours of many learned men. Perhaps this very uncertainty should be sufficient to convince us, that the earliest forms of services were extremely short and variable-otherwise more ample specimens of them would have reached posterity. On the other hand, the scanty passages which are adduced from Ignatius, Justin, Irenæus, and Tertullian, certainly prove, that there were some fixed prayers in use in some of the ancient Churches, which may or may not have been common to them all. And this usage was an imitation, imperfect as it was, of the Jewish offices. On the other hand there are many of the early Ecclesiastical terms, and some few ceremonies chiefly of the third century, which are more usually considered of Pagan derivation, though some of them may with equal justice be ascribed to a Jewish original. The oldest name for the chancel was Ovotasηpiov, Ara Dei, or Altare; oblations were made there, and 'the unbloody sacrifice' offered up, and frankincense smoked, and lamps were lighted, even during the persecutions of the Church; even votive donations (donaria--ava¤ýμata) were suspended in the yet rude and ill-constructed temples of Christ. But the simple superstition of the Faithful in those ages did not proceed to more dangerous excesses. It was reserved for the following century to fill those temples with images, and to introduce into the Sanctuaries of God the predominating spirit of Paganism. In reference to the facts which we have now stated, and which carry with them the plain conclusions to which we proceed, it seems only necessary to observe-first, that we are not to attend to those writers who represent the ante-Nicene Church as the perfect model of a Christian society as the unfailing storehouse whence universal and perpetual rules of doctrine and discipline may be derived with confidence, and followed with submission. The truth is far otherwise; and though we ought assuredly to distinguish the authority of the apostolical from that of the later uninspired writers, still even the works of those first Fathers are not without much imperfection, and furnish, besides, very insufficient materials for the construction or defence of any system; and in the extensive variety both of opinions and arguments which distinguishes their successors from Justin to Eusebius, we cannot fail to observe, that the former are sometimes erroneous, and the latter very commonly feeble and inconsequential. From such facts we are compelled to infer, that the true nature and design of Christ's mission on earth were not yet very perfectly comprehended by the mass of Christians in the second and third centuries. Indeed, it was scarcely possible that it could be otherwise, since they consisted of converts, or the children of converts, many of whom were imbued with the deep and unbending prejudices of Judaism, and the others attached by long hereditary affection to the splendid ceremonies of Paganism. To either of these classes it was necessary to address a peculiar form of argument, and to present a peculiar view of the religion, that there might be any just hope of persuading them to embrace it. We should also mention that some of the errors of the third, and even of the second century, may be ascribed to the undue weight already attached to apostolical tradition, and the authority that was blindly attributed to any precept or usage, however obscurely traced to that uncertain source. Bingham (Church Antiq. Book xiii., chap, v.) in prosecution of this subject, exhibits too warmly the zeal of an advocate. But, in the second place, we are equally bound to remark, that the fundamental doctrines of Christianity shine with a steady and continuous light through the strange mists in which the ante-Nicene Church has sometimes involved them; it was a great advantage which that age possessed over those which followed, that it confined itself to plain and scriptural expressions, and was contented to deliver the truths of God in the language of the holy writings. Moreover, we should add, that among the abuses which we have described, though some were shameful to their inventors, and injurious to the cause, there were many which, in their origin, were comparatively, if not absolutely, innocent: in many instances they arose rather from the circumstances of the converts than from the design of the priesthood, and there were few, if any, among them which might not have been arrested after the establishment of Christianity, if that security which gave power to the ministers of religion had conferred wisdom and true piety along with it. To conclude, then:—a general view of the Church of the three first ages presents to us a body always unconnected with the State, frequently at variance with it; surrounded by multitudes of heresies, many of them very monstrous, which it combated with the sword of the Spirit alone; under a government in which the gradually-increasing influence of the Bishop was still for the most part extremely limited by the power of his presbytery; with a rule of faith not curiously definite on abstruse questions, but simply conceived and scripturally expressed-rising into strength and confirming its consistency, and, finally, making good its long-neglected claims to toleration and respect. A closer examination of the same body discloses to us a number of stains and defects, proceeding at different moments from various causes, and spreading, in some degree, as that advanced in magnitude: but they had not yet penetrated to its heart, they might still have been checked, and even removed, by an influential and truly Christian priesthood. It is true that the substantial and fatal corruptions of after ages sprang, in many instances, directly from them; but the crime of those consequences must rest, for the most part, with those who combined and perpetuated the first abuses; for these were indeed rather the produce of circumstances than the work of men. have also observed, in the various conditions of apostolical Christianity, the scattered elements of some forms of government and discipline, which, though they were very early absorbed by the episcopal system, should not be passed over in silence, since they are still pleaded as precedents and imitated as models by many excellent Christians. We From Constantine to II. Fleury, who is the most moderate and reasonable of the Roman Catholic historians, laments that after the first six centuries the brightest days of the Church were passed away*. In his first Discourse he represents the brilliancy of that period in vivid and exaggerated colours. The reverence due to the sanctified martyr-the solemn aspect of monastic solitude-the piety and disinterested poverty of the early prelates the purity of their election-the austerity of their life-the magnificence of the offices-the severity of discipline-the venerable names of tradition and antiquity-are objects of his warm and indiscriminate *Discours sur l'Hist. Ecclés. depuis l'an 600 jusques à l'an 1100. Les beaux jours de l'Eglise sont passés, mais Dieu n'a pas rejetté son peuple ni oublié ses promesses,' &c. &c. It was one of the rules of discipline not to commit it to writing, but to preserve it by a secret tradition among the Bishops and Priests, chiefly that regarding the administration of the sacraments; and the better to keep that secret, that the Bishops should confide P |